I enjoyed Rocha’s film theory about the didactic and the epic. His writing it works a lot like his films. “How can the intellectual of the underdeveloped worldovercome his alienation and contradictions and attain a revolutionary lucidity?”
His films like DI and MARANHAO 66 reflect that desire to reach this “revolutionary lucidity” through breaking away from the colonialism structures and mores of European society through film. I noticed the use of close ups, frenetic editing, and handheld camera. He was willing to be crude to make audiences and others uncomfortable with the truth of life. This seems to be line in the standard of Cinema Novo.
AMAZONAS, AMAZONAS is probably the calmest and more “standard” of his films, so it was cool to see the evolution of this didactic/epic idea.
I also really enjoyed the CAT SKIN short film because of the way it was a simple story that reveals the truths and difficulties of race and class in Brazil.
Jahsira Williams
Laura Ortiz – Glauber Rocha’s approach to revolutionary and protest cinema during Brazil’s military dictatorship was both innovative and subversive, using allegory, metaphor, and direct confrontation to challenge social and political injustices. His films defied conventional storytelling, embracing raw, frenetic cinematography, disjointed narratives, and visceral imagery to expose the realities of poverty, oppression, and colonial influence. Works like Deus e o Diabo na Terra do Sol and Terra em Transe cleverly navigated censorship by embedding radical critiques within historical, religious, and mythological symbolism, forcing audiences to engage critically with Brazil’s socio-political landscape. Rocha’s belief in an “aesthetic of hunger” rejected polished, Westernized filmmaking in favor of an urgent, unfiltered style that mirrored the struggles of the marginalized. His commitment to cinema as a tool for resistance continues to inspire filmmakers seeking to use the medium as a form of defiance and revolutionary expression.